1. Centre for Transport Studies From Urban Roads to Living Streets: Making the Change Peter Jones Professor of Transport and Sustainable Development Keynote Speech: Living Streets Annual Supporters Conference, June 2013

2. Centre for Transport Studies Contents My role and aims Roads Task Force Report – a great opportunity Some recent research findings: –Traffic signal removal and pedestrians –Streets as interchanges –Street activities –Mapping furniture footprints Taking stock –Gaps in knowledge –Opportunities and allies

3. Centre for Transport Studies My role and aims Role: the EC’s ‘critical friend’ model Aims: –Highlight opportunities created by forthcoming RTF report –Show examples of wealth of research to draw on, alongside practical experience –Encourage closer working between activists and academics –Propose a future challenge

4. Centre for Transport Studies Roads Task Force (RTF) report Set up by the Mayor to take a long-term look at the needs of London’s roads – independent panel Report due to be launched on 10 th July Key messages: –Most London roads are ‘streets’, with multiple functions –This is MUCH more than just about vehicle movement –Quality of public realm and street experience crucial to continuing success of London as a global leading city –Can’t continue to ‘compromise’ all the time

5. The RTF has identified six road/street functions

6. 6 A Family of ‘Street types’ Bringing them together: London’s street family

7. Centre for Transport Studies Implications This is important because: –It recognises that streets have multiple functions, emphasising many things that Living Streets has been promoting for a long time –It gets way from the ‘one size fits all’ mentality: vehicle traffic is NOT always the first priority –It gives full weight to Place/Living street functions –This requires new approaches to sensitive street design and community engagement – again, where Living Streets has much to offer

8. Centre for Transport Studies Workshop 1: Local Stakeholders

9. Centre for Transport Studies ‘Conventional’ approach to street design Residential area District shopping centre

10. Centre for Transport Studies ‘Balanced’ approach to street design Residential area District shopping centre

11. Centre for Transport Studies Sample of research findings Impacts of traffic signal removal on pedestrians (Clare Woodcock) Streets as interchanges (Ian James) Street activities (Lucy Godfrey) Mapping street furniture footprints (Rachel Palfreeman)

12. Centre for Transport Studies Signal removal: four case study sites Wyndham Way junction with High Street

13. Centre for Transport Studies Changes in pedestrian behaviour Cabstand/ Wyndham Way Wyndham Way/ High Street Jermyn Street/ Duke Street Saint James Ruislip Road East/ Greenford Avenue Pedestrian Flow The sameIncreased Decreased CompositionChanged by a small amount, not statistically significant. Formal and informal crossing Informal crossing increased. Informal crossing decreased by significant percentage (-16%). DelayDecreased in HPHV and LPHV, increased in LPLV. Decreased during LPHV and HPHV conditions, and remained the same during LPLV. Increased during two conditions: HPHV, LPLV and remained the same during LPHV. Increased during all four conditions. Crossing Speed Decreased during all conditions Increased during LPLV, remained the same during HPHV and LPHV. Increased during all conditions Increased during all conditions.

14. Centre for Transport Studies Junction safety Cabstand/ Wyndham Way Wyndham Way/ High Street Jermyn Street/ Duke Street Saint James Ruislip Road East/ Greenford Avenue Accident Statistics No accidents before or after. Number of accidents increased after the signals were removed. - No pedestrian accidents. One accident before, one accident after. No pedestrian accidents. Six accidents before, two were pedestrian/ vehicle collisions. No accident information available after signal removal. Pedestrian perceptions: Ealing

15. Centre for Transport Studies Conclusions Clear benefits to vehicles from removing signals Junction layout key influence on pedestrian impacts Traffic signal removal is most appropriate where there are equal numbers of pedestrians and vehicles, and where vehicle speed is relatively slow. Least appropriate at junctions where there are dominant vehicle movements in which removing control might encourage increased vehicle speeds. Removal of signalised control should be considered alongside traffic calming measures such as chicanes, raised tables, speed bumps or lower speed limits. Provision for vulnerable pedestrians, particularly for the mobility impaired remains a key concern because without signal facilities, vulnerable pedestrians may be unable to cross the junction.

16. Centre for Transport Studies Streets as ‘interchanges’ Tooting Broadway, South London

17. Centre for Transport Studies Levels of bus-to-bus interchange, Route 333

18. Centre for Transport Studies Asymmetrical bus passenger flows, Tooting Broadway

19. Centre for Transport Studies Range of footway users…. Striders – ‘traffic’ Traders Customers Browsers Queuers Entertainers Socialisers Observers Waiters Resters Inhabiters

20. Centre for Transport Studies

21. The Variety of Street Activities…

22. Centre for Transport Studies Street activities: Great George Street

23. Centre for Transport Studies

24. Range of footway services Retail services (stalls, paper sellers, etc.) Communications (phone & post boxes) Cash point machines Public transport services (shelters, info.) Public amenity (seating, toilets, bins,…) Public art and greenery Wayfinding and traffic regulation

25. Centre for Transport Studies

26. What is a street furniture ‘footprint’? Bus shelter and footprint Bin and footprint Street space available is therefore reduced

27. Centre for Transport Studies Some street furniture ‘footprints’ Size of Furniture (width x length) Total Footprint Cycle stand0.10m x 0.60 m0.60m x 1.30m Bench0.48m x 1.06m1.18m x 1.18m Rubbish bin0.50m x 0.50m1.20m x 1.50m Bus stop area1.30m x 3.25m2.40m x 3.90m

28. Centre for Transport Studies Taking Stock: Gaps in knowledge Vehicle movement is well research and applied: –Full design standards –Quantitative performance measures –Comprehensive modelling capability –Extensive appraisal of benefits Less is understood about pedestrian movement Virtually NOTHING is known about street activity: –No established design standards –No robust ‘performance measures’ –No modelling and appraisal

29. Centre for Transport Studies Taking Stock: Where do we stand? “Living streets” chimes with the times, so a good start! But, this is about much more than ‘pedestrians’! Most work on streets still on a modal basis, not holistic, and General reference to ‘encouraging walking and cycling’ And the balance of attention?? –80% cycling –15% walking –5% street activity

30. Centre for Transport Studies Opportunities and Allies Scope for academics, practitioners and activists to work closer together – while recognising each others’ agendas RTF report provides a good basis for moving forward – putting the ‘living’ back into streets! It recognises the key importance of streets as ‘places’ and the need to raise street quality and foster street activity Many powerful groups support this change of emphasis – health, developers, retailers, etc. But streets need ‘champions’ and ‘custodians’, who cherish the diversity of urban streets and their functions

31. Centre for Transport Studies Opportunities and Allies Scope for academics, practitioners and activists to work closer together – while recognising each others’ agendas RTF report provides a good basis for moving forward – putting the ‘living’ back into streets! It recognises the key importance of streets as ‘places’ and the need to raise street quality and foster street activity Many powerful groups support this change of emphasis – health, developers, retailers, etc. But streets need ‘champions’ and ‘custodians’, who cherish the diversity of urban streets and their functions ….is this where YOU come in?